Excellent review and you covered all my points from my comments of weeks ago. I'm going to seriously look at buying the 1.5hp model. By the way, I am very happy with my Laguna Revo 18/36 after 5 months of use.
I just bought a CFlux. I bought the 110 version thinking I could avoid wiring for 220. Well silly me. Once I assembled it and plugged it in it blew all the breakers in my shop. I went to the manual and in the electrical specs it said it needed a 30amp dedicated 110 circuit. All I had was the standard 15A 110 in my shop so I ended up needing to hire an electrician anyway. Beware can’t just plug this beast in and get going. You’re going to need an electrician. I wish that was made clear before I bought it. I might have just got a 220 version instead.
I don’t have any 30 amp 110V circuits. I used a 20amp and never had any problems. But you’re right; It definitely won’t work on a 15 amp. I’m sorry if i didn’t cover that in the video. I definitely should have.
Great review! I would be interested in seeing the fan curve flow rate with 5" or 6" flex. I am trying to decide between the 1.5 and 2 hp CFlux. I will be connecting directly to my tools and want to target about 800CFM.
Sorry that I missed this. Take a look at the diagrams in this video and you will see what my actual measurements were for the 1.5 HP units. The 3 minute mark shows a good representation of what you are doing. I never got to try the 2 HP unit.
Seems to be a solid unit. I installed the 1.5 HP 110v version. Very well made. My only complaint is the amperage requirements. Do keep in mind that you need a 20 amp minimum, and even with that, I blew mine today 1 out of 10 times. This is the circuit I run a Sawstop PCS 110v on without any issue.
Interesting. I never popped a breaker on a 20 amp circuit. It runs pretty close to the edge though. It might be worth trying a different breaker on the circuit. There’s a bit of variability in the sensitivity.
I don’t recall, but if I did use an extension it would have been a short one with 12 gauge wire, which is almost let using no extension cord at all. That’ll make a big difference.
Is there a helix baffle inside the collector inlet chamber to direct the air flow into a vortex flow? I like all the other aspects as shown. A good view looking into the upper chamber would help. Thank You
Hi Dan, I'm not sure, and unfortunately I no longer have these eval units in my shop. Probably worth giving Laguna a call to ask that, or maybe there's a parts diagram in the manual.
I noticed the PFLUX1 doesn't have a smaller bag hanging down the back of it like the CFLUX1. Does it have a different way in collecting and removing the dust that is too light for the main collector?
Hi Bryan, yep, and that is something that I should have shown in the video as well now that you mention it. Dang. The PFLUX has a 4" dust below the filter, and you just hook a dust hose to it and clean it out with the suction of the cyclone itself. Very slick design.
Thanks very much for your in depth review. I am just at the point of buying a DC so your review is particularly timely and the Laguna PFlux1 is/was my primary candidate. Your results are approximately in line with Laguna's specs on their web site EXCEPT for the sound level of the PFlux1 which they claim as 70 Db @ 9.8ft. That is a particular selling point for me. Is there anything about their or your testing methodology that would account for this difference? If the difference is really only a couple of decibels between the CFlux1 and PFlux1 like your tests show, I'd probably go with the CFlux1 instead.
Hi Charles, I'm not familiar with how they tested, but my guess would be in a large factory setting where sound dissipates better. My shop is small at 650 square feet and 10' ceiling height, so there's not much room for the sound to escape. I ran the test multiple times and I feel confident in the accuracy. Given all of the variables in involved in measuring sound output, I'm not suggesting that their results are inaccurate, but I suspect that something was dramatically different about the testing environment.
Thanks for your thoughts. Just to be clear your CFlux sound level numbers are similar to the Laguna specs; it's only the PFlux that has the wide discrepancy. You could test your hypothesis by moving the machines outside and measuring the sound levels in the open air. It would be interesting to me at least. :-) Thanks again, Charles
Hi Charles (sorry for calling you Charlie previously), that's a fair request. I rolled each of them out into the middle of my driveway, 10 feet away from the building. In this situation my readings averaged 76 db on the CFLUX and 74 on the PFLUX.
That sounds awful. Make sure that you have the deflector plate installed above the barrel. This was missing on some early models and makes a huge difference. Also, be sure that your barrel is sealed. If you skip the step where you seal the seams it can cause problems like that. And finally, make sure that you have a long straight duct run leading into the cyclone. Ideally the first 8' is straight. If you have a bend coming right out of the cyclone it can lead to poor air dust separation. I hope you can get this sorted out. The 1.5 HP units that I had in my shop were very effective at air/dust separation. Exceeded my expectations. The 3 HP unit wasn't quite as good, but improved after I installed the deflector plate.
Your review shows great promise for these machines design improvements. I do have a couple of questions: 1)Was your dust feed rate the same as what is in the video? If so that would be unrealistically slow compared to a real world drum sander or router feed rate and would explain the high separation rate (which outperforms full size professional cyclones). 2) Since you only appear to review Laguna products do they compensate you in any way? Is that why there has not been any competitive comparisons of other brands of cyclones? Thanks, Carl
Hi Carl, Good question about the ingest rate. The test that was shown in the video was done with varying feed rates. I tried to introduce an element of “real world” into it by going from a very slow trickle to a heavier feed, then back again. It was non-scientific, but I tried to find weaknesses in separation. Overall I believe that the feed rate was faster on average than a real world feed, rather than slower. I didn’t time it when I did it, but I’d guess that I spent somewhere in the range of 3 minutes to suck up 5 gallons. I did it multiple times with variations in feed rate throughout the process and saw pretty consistent results each time. I have no intention of testing only Laguna products, and I would have preferred to not have so much imbalance in my initial coverage. It has "just happened" this way as I’ve taken the opportunity to have an early look at some new products, however, which I enjoy and people seem to be interested in. I have one more video to finish up on this set of dust collectors, and then I’ll be working on some other videos outside the Laguna family, which I’m looking forward to. Laguna sponsored this project as a firewalled test. They provide product and have no input or influence on how the tests are structured or how the results are communicated. Because of this approach, you’ll note that my findings are dramatically different from theirs in a couple of areas, including CFM (1300 vs. 850 CFM) and sound (81 vs. 70db on the PF1). Those are dramatic and non-flattering differences for Laguna, and yes, it would be interesting to know how these results would compare to other comparable products. I am interested in doing competitive comparisons, and Laguna has no say on whether I do these or not. Doing competitive studies on big equipment like is logistically challenging and time consuming,however, and I need to work that out. But I definitely see the value of this type of information and hope to be able to provide it at some point.
Good stuff, thanks. How well do you find the led sensors actually work in practice? Can the bin sensor especially be relied on to alert you before airflow is diminished?
Hi Geoff, thanks for the comment. The bin full sensor worked fine in my basic tests, but I'll caveat that by saying that I didn't fill the drum enough times to give it a fair test to represent production. My question is whether it will get flaky as it develops static and dust sticks to it, giving a false positive. Just now I tried packing it with dust, and scratching the surface a bit to see if it caused any problems, and it still works perfectly. Time will tell with this type of thing, but it seems like a good quality component from a starting point anyway. As far as alerting you before the air flow is diminished, you can adjust the beam so that it notifies you earlier, and if you do a lot of planing, you might want to adjust it for an early indication because you can go from half full to over full in just a couple minutes with a planer. When I permanently install the PFLUX3 in my shop I will likely set it to start indicating pretty early, because it's a lot easier and less messy to empty the drum before it is overflowing.
Excellent review. One question about the volumetric flow measurements: You measured flow in an open ended duct. Shouldn't the intended tool be connected? For example, if you need 600 cfm at your 14|bx bandsaw, shouldn't it be connected because it will add to the static load? It would be extraordinarily useful to see results for this test if you'd be willing to hook up the collector to your 14|12 or 14|bx.
Thank you. You are correct; most tools such as a band saw will impose some additional static pressure and the tool needs to be accounted for in the overall design. That, and the fact that performance will decline as the filter is loaded, are reasons for not cutting it close on your air flow requirements. I no longer have the 1.5 HP machines in my shop so I cannot do the specific test that you requested, but I'll do a the test on the PFLUX 3 and let you know what the decrease in CFM is when I add a 14bx.
Thank you. This will be exceptionally helpful and interesting. With two ports vs. one, I cannot decide if the 14|bx will show lower static load than the 14|12, or if the load will be determined by the openings for airflow up by the blade port in the table.
OK, here are the results. This was on the extreme longest run in my shop which I use as a floor sweep, so to be clear I would not hook up a band saw on this port for actual use. The duct run consists of roughly 45 feet of 6" pipe with (5) 90s and (1) 45, plus a 15 - 20' section of 4" flex. I tested with the duct not connected, then connected to the upper port and left the bottom port open and saw an increase in SP of .4, and a drop in CFM of 96. Then I blocked the lower port and saw a further increase in SP or .3, and an additional decline in CFM of 23. Again these tests were performed using a PFLUX3. I no longer have a 14|12 in my shop by it is probably similar to the results when blocking the lower port. If your dust collector is powerful enough you would obviously be better off making two 4" drops off of your main line (assuming that it is larger than 4") and connecting to both ports. Good luck with your decision.
That was fast! You have a system curve in your video at 1:30 which, although for different machines, has a slope of about 75 CFM per inch w.c. of pressure. You see 240 CFM per inch for the first 0.3 inches and 170 cfm per inch when the full 0.7 inches w.c. is added. You're at the end of the line and I'm guessing are far out on the system curve where it is steeper, so what you're seeing seems consistent with the curves in the video (which I realize are for different machines). So, if I had a minimal connection, just a few feet and maybe two 45 degree elbows, plus the 0.7" loss at the saw, let's say that sums up to around 3 inches total w.c. Then, for the MYC1 I could meet Laguna's 350 cfm requirement for their 14|12, but not the target 600 cfm, but I could get 600 cfm from the CFLUX1. Maybe if we took the MYC1 through a wye to both ports we could get closer to 600 for the bx? I wish manufacturers gave these numbers, e.g., additional load for a tool vs. cfm and system curves for the fans. I have a little garage shop, strongly hand tools, and only need to handle a bandsaw, so with this ballpark number of 0.7" w.c. (call it 1 inch), I can try to cook something up. Thanks so much for doing this.
Hi, thank you for the review. I am currently in the market for a dust collector and was thinking of a machine similar to this. I only have what amounts to a 1 stall garage as a shop, so footprint (and sound level) are important to me. Any thoughts as to how these might fit in a space like that? I'm also considering the b- flux or perhaps the rockler dust right system. I understand that those are not cyclones but if space is a factor I may have to go with something smaller. Its hard to find the right one when there are no local stores with demo models set up to get a good idea of size. Thanks for any input!
The 1.5 HP PFLUX/CFLUX machines are not large. If you look at the footprint dimensions on the Laguna site the C/PFLUX has a smaller footprint than the BFLUX. In terms of the dust right system, it's a cool concept but no way will you pull adequate CFM with that using a 20 foot flexible hose, and I'd rather have no dust collector than one with a 30 micron bag. I would bet that if you did an air quality test before and after installing that, you'd find that you're quality decreased. You might find a 1 HP system with a good filter that saves you a bit of footprint over a small cyclone, and that might be a decent option if you keep your ducting short. I've never done any testing with this size unit, so It's a total SWAG, but I suspect that you could get in the 400 CFM range with 5' of flex hose on a 1 HP machine. If I have a chance to test on a machine in this category any time soon I'll try it and let you know.
I like the PFLUX better, mainly due to the pressurized barrel and no need for the drum liner. This makes it easier and less messy to empty the barrel. The bin full indicator is nice too. So, it comes down to money, but if you can swing a few extra bucks for those features the PFLUX is great upgrade. I am now using the PFLUX 3 in my shop and loving it.
Actually, Trevor, let me qualify that by saying one more thing. First and foremost, buy the machine that delivers the right CFM for your shop. So, if you have $1500 to spend, and you want to get the best machine from this product line that you can, I'd favor the CFLUX2 over the PFLUX1. I'd rather have the additional power. But if you have decided that the 1.5 HP machine is the right one for your shop, and you can swing the additional $ for the PFLUX, then that's a good call.
Thanks Paul. This is such perfect timing. I'm curious why Laguna does not use a filter crank on the PFlux? Is it due to the construction type of the HEPA filter? So would you lean to one or the other of these two units? Looking forward to the comparison to the 3 HP. Are also going to do the competitor comparison?
Hi Jeff, thanks for the feedback. You are correct in your speculation as to why they do not use the filter crank on the PFLUX. I asked Laguna about this as well, and apparently there is a potential that the paddle will damage the filter over time. Based on the air/dust separation results that I measured, I don't think having a cleaning mechanism is likely a factor. 1 tablespoon for 5 gallons of MDF dust is nothing, and MDF dust is a worst case scenario in my shop. Time will tell, of course, but I wouldn't see using the filter cleaning mechanism very often. When I saw that the CFLUX had one, I was actually concerned and kinda figured that would mean that it was not good at separation and that I'd be using it a lot. I was completely blown away by how well they have managed to separate dust from air in such a low profile machine. I don't understand the physics behind this very well, but somehow they managed to pull it off. As far as which one I'd choose, that's a great question. I have a son with dust allergies, so I'm a bit of a fanatic about air quality (my shop is connected to the house), so the HEPA filter is nice and I might lean that way for that reason. Having said that, 1 micron filtration on the CFLUX is respectable. The difference in sound levels doesn't matter much to me, because they're both quiet "enough", and quieter than most of my tools so I won't hear them when I'm working anyway. I turn my cyclone off an on a lot, so it's mostly only running when I have a tool running. The ability to use a bag in the drum without the metal liner is also a big plus for the PFLUX series. I'll get started on the comparison to the PFLUX 3 shortly. Functionality wise it is identical to the PFLUX1, so it will be all about the fan curve, and maintaining adequate air flow in a larger shop. I'll compile the fan curve data shortly and put a chart on our FB page. As far as the competitive comparison, I'm hoping to do this after I wrap up with the PFLUX3 video. That would be a very fun project for sure.
ToolMetrix any idea if/when you will do the competitor comparison? Woodcraft has 10% off of Laguna for most of Oct. so wondering if You might publish your next installment before the sale is over.
Hi Jeff, Thanks for asking. I doubt that I'll be able to pull the competitive comparison off very quickly, unfortunately, but the more I think about it, the more I'm wanting to do it. I'm working on a plan to do this now, and I think the approach will be interesting but time consuming. In terms of the Laguna 3HP video, I probably won't have that done for a few weeks, but I can share the testing results with you if it will help with your decision. Give me a few minutes and I'll publish some data out on our FB page at facebook.com/Toolmetrix/. What I've done so far is done sound testing and enough air flow testing to create a fan curve, and I'll push that data out there. What I want to do before the video is hook it up to a bunch of actual ducting configurations and include the CFM and SP values for each of these in the video just like I did with the 1.5 HP machines. This is a big piece of missing information that I think is helpful for people making decisions. CFM and SP values alone are an interesting data point, but can also be somewhat confusing and misleading because static pressure is not fixed in a given duct configuration, but rather it is variable based on the air velocity.
ToolMetrix I'm not that interested in the 3 HP unit. I don't want to add another 220 outlet and I'm not going to plumb dust collection. Plus I'm limiting my budget on this.
Ah, OK; thanks, Jeff. For the competitive comparison I am likely going to focus on 220V machines for the first round anyway, because the differentiation in fan curves is likely to be more pronounced.
That's a great question. It is not referenced in the manual, so I spoke with a Laguna representative on this. They said that it was not specifically designed for this. But I looked at it, and I think you could do it. It appears that you'd have to reroute a small vacuum line, and disconnect/reconnect the wiring to the motor, but it from the outside it appears that the panels on each side are interchangeable and that it would work. I know that this doesn't give you the confidence that you would want in order to buy one, but I'd suggest nudging Laguna on this to find out. One of their techs could figure this out in an hour or so, and I'm sure that they'll get this question a lot. On a related note, the inlet tube can be rotated 30 degrees toward the rear, and 60 degrees toward the front, to provide a better angle for positioning the machine.
I'm looking at purchasing the older MCY model as it's on sale for $500 cheaper than the 1.5 C Flux. Going to be hooking it up to a CNC machine that will be cutting foam surf boards. Do you think I'm better off to pay the extra $500 for the C Flux or will the older model for fine for what I'm doing?
Hi Paul, Wow, that will be a challenging material for air/dust separation. My only experience is with wood dust, so I don't have any qualified advice to provide for you. In terms of CFM, I also don't know how much air flow is needed for good extraction with this material, but at least you can see from my test results what kind of flow you can expect from each model.
Could you tell me about the power requirements for the PFlux3? Normally I would think a 20A breaker and 220V outlet would be sufficient for a 3HP motor, but the Laguna website suggests a 30A breaker/outlet is needed. Is this the case? That means calling out an electrician, which I'd prefer not to do.
+geoff katz I thought the same thing so I tried running it on two different 20 amp circuits and it blew breakers right away. After it was up and running on a 30 amp circuit I checked the amperage draw and it was about 20.
I haven't created a video yet, but I've put a chart with the CFM tests out on the ToolMetrix FB page. I'm still planning to do a video on the 3HP unit but haven't had time yet.
Hey Paul, just curious I was reading over on one of the Woodworking forums that you mentioned somewhere that you didn't get great results with the PFLUX3 until you had talked with Laguna and they sent you some type of steel plate to add to the end of cyclone or something extending into the dust bin, is this true and if so do you have a link to a picture or know what they call it?
Hi Nick. Yes, I was getting quite a bit of debris bypassing the drum and ending up in the filter on the PFLUX3. A different experience from what I found when I tested the 1.5 HP machines for this video, as the 1.5 HP machines produced impressive air/flow separation. When I reported this to Laguna they sent out a very simple metal plate that they described as a crossbar, which gets installed between the cyclone funnel and the drum. I've now been using this for a month or so, and filled the barrel up several times with only the tiniest amount of debris ending up in the filter bin; results that are more inline with the separation that I measured on the 1.5 HP machines. I will include this in the PFLUX3 video that I hope to finish and get posted here soon. For now you can see what the part looks like over on the ToolMetrix FB page. facebook.com/Toolmetrix/.
@@ToolMetrix I guess your still working on that PFLUX3 video 2 years later, since I don't see it in your list of videos. What's the problem? Was it too negative?
i was bummed that I couldn’t get one done. I didn’t have it in my shop long enough to complete the video by the time the separation plate was in place. After that was installed the air/dust separation was vastly improved. I never ran the full tests that I did on the 1.5 hp machines but anecdotally id say it wasn’t quite as good but it was decent after the plate was installed. Without that the separation wasn’t very good compared to the 1.5 HP units. I measured sound output at 87 dB which was higher than the spec but all tools are in my shop are that way. Small shop with Sheetrock walls. It was quieter than the clear vue that I had in there previously and a bit louder than a dust gorilla with a silencer. Amperage draw was 19-20 and I definitely needed a 30 amp circuit.
On the Pflux 1 what do the 2 small buttons on the control panel do? One says system the other says remote. Also there is a small button on the remote. The manual does not say what any of these do. Thanks
Thanks,I guess mine came paired to the remote as it worked right away.So is the button on the remote for pairing also? The small one under the start-stop buttons. Did you find any of this in the manual? I could not find a thing about it.
Just curious if you had tried running the cflux 1 on a ducting setup. Laguna states that with 5.85 inches of static pressure with 785 cfm. I want to run about 30 ft which equals around 5.5 inches of static pressure.
In this video I went into detail on the ducting configurations that I tested, and the real world data that I produced. I didn't run any tests beyond what I described and illustrated here.
Read some not so good reviews of the P Flux3 . Is this the reason there is no video? Also, the crossbar fix you mention in a comment, has this been added to all ne units shipped now?
Sorry I missed this. I thought I had responded but I don't see my response here now. By the time I got the crossbar, I was out of time and had to move it out. The crossbar helped a lot, although wasn't as good at air/dust separation as the smaller units. Yes, the crossbar now comes standard with the product.
Just curious but why does your channel only contain reviews of Laguna tools? Seems like a marketing arm of Laguna? I have one of their original mobile cyclones and I can tell you I get much more than 3 tablespoons of dust in the bag after the filter.
Hi Ron, yep, it is Laguna-heavy for now; totally agree. There's one more video planned, which is very tardy, to wrap up the focus on Laguna dust collection. Then there will be videos on other tools, and maybe some projects too. In terms of separation results that you are seeing, our tests show way more than 3 tablespoons too. The test in the video shows twice as much as that, and keep in mind that is only for 5 gallons of dust, so for a full 30 gallon drum (or is it 35?) you would see 36 tablespoons of dust. That means lot of time spent cleaning the filter; not good. I had similar problems with the new PFLUX3, which I'll include in the video when I can find some time to create it. I reported this to Laguna and they sent out a steel plate that gets installed between the cyclone and the drum, and it made a dramatic difference in separation. Now the PFLUX3 is more comparable to the 1.5 HP machines. It might be worth contacting Laguna to see if there is a way to adapt this plate to their old machines.
Hey Paul gonna buy a PFlux just have a couple questions. Im putting the mach. in my rear shop which means about 25' of pipe to get inside my m. shop.Biggest single draw will be Makita 2030N plan/joint. 1rst is will the remote pass through walls? 2nd does the 2HP model have enough CFM to be otimal for the run using 6" pipe? Thank you Michael
Hi Michael, the remote is radio frequency so it doesn't need direct line of site, but going through a wall and a long distance might be too much to ask. I am not near my dust collector right now so I can't try it for you unfortunately, but Laguna should be able to offer some guidelines on this. In terms of the 2HP and its ability to meet your requirements, if you want to get 500 - 600 CFM at your longest/worst run, it feels like a stretch to me. I haven't tested the 2 HP unit, but I've looked at the fan curve and it is a bit more robust than the 1.5 HP, but not a ton. A 1.5 HP unit wouldn't be able to deliver adequate air flow in your situation; not even close.
I know this is a year old, but I just bought the 1.5 HP cflux (it is being delivered today) and everything I read was to use 6" ducting as much as possible. Would 6" be too much for this machine?
I wouldn’t use 6” ducts with this machine. You won’t be able to maintain adequate air speed in the ducts. I’d go 4”, keep your duct runs short and use as much hard piping as possible.
Any problem with downtime on these that you can comment on? Not many reviews for these yet but one of the reviews I did read was negative...stating that the unit had shut down several times and he had no time for downtime. Any feedback on this topic?
Thanks for the review! I am very curious to know how you think these hold up to the Clear Vue cyclones since I know you've worked with both. Bill Pentz would argue the cyclones and motor aren't large enough to effectively separate and collect fine dust but the figures you're getting and that Laguna is claiming seem to be in evidence to the contrary. I would rather buy the Laguna because it's a heck of a lot more convenient shape, size, more mobile, and quieter, but if Clear Vue is still the supposed "only" dust collector available capable of providing a safe work environment, I might just have to go with the CV1800. I'm torn. Penny for your thoughts?
Sure, here are a few thoughts on this. From an air flow perspective you would need to step up to a 3HP Laguna machine to match the CV1800; then you are in the same ballpark. I've posted my air flow test results on the ToolMetrix FB page, and plan to include these in a video at some point as well. I had a CV in my shop for about 5 years and loved it; great product, great company. Given what I saw in my tests, I think Laguna might give CV a run for their money on separation, although it will take more data points than the simple tests that I ran here. I’m a fan of Bill Pentz’ research and I’m extremely grateful for what he has done to raise awareness of dust collection challenges. I understand the theory as to why these cyclones should not have separated as well as they did in my tests. I was surprised by the results myself, and I ran the test again with nearly identical results. Clear Vue has the advantage of being American made, including the very nice motor, and I also like the ability to quickly see when the drum is full by just glancing at the cyclone from anywhere in the shop. To Laguna’s credit they have set a new standard for convenience with these new machines, as the drum management system is absolutely superb and the pressure balanced drum in the PFLUX is a nice bonus as well. The Laguna PFLUX 3 is a few decibels quieter as well. I did not have a CFLUX 3 to test, but I'm guessing it is roughly the same on sound output as the CV 1800.
When you use the crank to dislodge the dust from the canister, a small cloud of dust comes through the filter. Doesnt this defeat the purpose of a dust collector? See my assembly issues too at th-cam.com/video/jIoSGhzS5qc/w-d-xo.html
I'm not sure if you are seeing that cloud on my video or in your shop. I didn't notice that at all in my shop. The units that I had did such a good job of air/dust separation during my testing that there wouldn't have been much dust in the filter to form a cloud. That said, most of the dust should fall down into the bin, and not go through the filter. I'm sure some very small percentage of the tiny particles does sneak past the filter, but I don't believe that it should be enough to form a visible cloud. Either way I guess it probably makes sense to wear a dust mask while you clean the filter or empty the bin. I don't have a flap system on my current cyclone, so I take it outside once in a while and blow the dust out with a leaf blower. It makes a mess but it does a great job of cleaning it. I watched your assembly video; wow, that's frustrating. I never saw the final version of the manual during my assembly because it wasn't available when I got these early units. I assembled four different cyclones in one weekend with a single rough draft manual. Well, actually the older model cyclone had a finished manual that was very nice actually, but the rough draft that I was using for the new models was very rough. I'm sorry to hear that the final version is inaccurate in so many aspects. Hopefully they will take your suggestions and make improvements on the manual. I assembled another one of these at a friends house many months after I had assembled these, and by that time there was an assembly video on the Laguna TH-cam channel. This was extremely helpful, and made the setup super easy. We didn't even use the manual; just followed along with the video.
Not only is that not true, but 99% would be considered poor separation. I had a Clear Vue cyclone in my shop for five years and it was great but separation results were similar to these units.
@@ToolMetrix That's really good to know - I was wondering why the Pentz models price points are so high. Good to hear your similar metrics. This was a fantastic review of the Laguna models, thank you.
@@ToolMetrix wow, that's pretty remarkable company to keep for the C/Pflux. Absolutely great review, too, btw. Question: outside of cost, what are your thoughts on deciding between the Pflux 1.5HP and Pflux 2HP?
Thank you. If you are planning to use the DC as a portable unit, rolling around and directly connecting to tools, then the 1.5 HP is great. For a VERY small ducting system, it could work as well. For most permanent ducting, however, the 2 HP is a better starting point.
Hi Sam, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I felt that these units compared quite favorably in this class of machine, so I'm surprised to hear that your assessment is so different. What did/do you not like about yours, and which product out there do you think is a better bet in the 1.5 HP cyclone category?
Well thanks a lot, you just destroyed all my reasons to keep putting off buying a Laguna DC system. Great video!
+MachTwo57 sorry to do that to you! Let me know which tool you're thinking about next and I'll try to get started on that one for you... 😂
Excellent review and you covered all my points from my comments of weeks ago. I'm going to seriously look at buying the 1.5hp model. By the way, I am very happy with my Laguna Revo 18/36 after 5 months of use.
Thanks for the feedback, Mike!
I just bought a CFlux. I bought the 110 version thinking I could avoid wiring for 220. Well silly me. Once I assembled it and plugged it in it blew all the breakers in my shop. I went to the manual and in the electrical specs it said it needed a 30amp dedicated 110 circuit. All I had was the standard 15A 110 in my shop so I ended up needing to hire an electrician anyway. Beware can’t just plug this beast in and get going. You’re going to need an electrician. I wish that was made clear before I bought it. I might have just got a 220 version instead.
I don’t have any 30 amp 110V circuits. I used a 20amp and never had any problems. But you’re right; It definitely won’t work on a 15 amp. I’m sorry if i didn’t cover that in the video. I definitely should have.
Great review! I would be interested in seeing the fan curve flow rate with 5" or 6" flex. I am trying to decide between the 1.5 and 2 hp CFlux. I will be connecting directly to my tools and want to target about 800CFM.
Sorry that I missed this. Take a look at the diagrams in this video and you will see what my actual measurements were for the 1.5 HP units. The 3 minute mark shows a good representation of what you are doing. I never got to try the 2 HP unit.
Seems to be a solid unit. I installed the 1.5 HP 110v version. Very well made. My only complaint is the amperage requirements. Do keep in mind that you need a 20 amp minimum, and even with that, I blew mine today 1 out of 10 times. This is the circuit I run a Sawstop PCS 110v on without any issue.
Interesting. I never popped a breaker on a 20 amp circuit. It runs pretty close to the edge though. It might be worth trying a different breaker on the circuit. There’s a bit of variability in the sensitivity.
@@ToolMetrix interesting. Did you go straight into the 20amp outlet or did you use any type of extension cord?
I don’t recall, but if I did use an extension it would have been a short one with 12 gauge wire, which is almost let using no extension cord at all. That’ll make a big difference.
@@ToolMetrix This one time, I’ll follow the destructions and install a 30Amp outlet. Feels like cheating.
Once again, great video!
Yeah, I reckon you won’t regret that. Thanks for the feedback sir.
Is there a helix baffle inside the collector inlet chamber to direct the air flow into a vortex flow? I like all the other aspects as shown. A good view looking into the upper chamber would help. Thank You
Hi Dan, I'm not sure, and unfortunately I no longer have these eval units in my shop. Probably worth giving Laguna a call to ask that, or maybe there's a parts diagram in the manual.
Once correction, you said "infrared so you don't need line of sight". If it's infrared you have to have line of sight.
You're absolutely right. Thank you!
you mean RF signal@@ToolMetrix
I noticed the PFLUX1 doesn't have a smaller bag hanging down the back of it like the CFLUX1. Does it have a different way in collecting and removing the dust that is too light for the main collector?
Hi Bryan, yep, and that is something that I should have shown in the video as well now that you mention it. Dang. The PFLUX has a 4" dust below the filter, and you just hook a dust hose to it and clean it out with the suction of the cyclone itself. Very slick design.
Thanks very much for your in depth review. I am just at the point of buying a DC so your review is particularly timely and the Laguna PFlux1 is/was my primary candidate. Your results are approximately in line with Laguna's specs on their web site EXCEPT for the sound level of the PFlux1 which they claim as 70 Db @ 9.8ft. That is a particular selling point for me. Is there anything about their or your testing methodology that would account for this difference? If the difference is really only a couple of decibels between the CFlux1 and PFlux1 like your tests show, I'd probably go with the CFlux1 instead.
Hi Charles, I'm not familiar with how they tested, but my guess would be in a large factory setting where sound dissipates better. My shop is small at 650 square feet and 10' ceiling height, so there's not much room for the sound to escape. I ran the test multiple times and I feel confident in the accuracy. Given all of the variables in involved in measuring sound output, I'm not suggesting that their results are inaccurate, but I suspect that something was dramatically different about the testing environment.
Thanks for your thoughts. Just to be clear your CFlux sound level numbers are similar to the Laguna specs; it's only the PFlux that has the wide discrepancy. You could test your hypothesis by moving the machines outside and measuring the sound levels in the open air. It would be interesting to me at least. :-) Thanks again, Charles
Hi Charles (sorry for calling you Charlie previously), that's a fair request. I rolled each of them out into the middle of my driveway, 10 feet away from the building. In this situation my readings averaged 76 db on the CFLUX and 74 on the PFLUX.
My filter gets clogged with the dust and the air starts flowing back and the dust starts blowing out from everywhere
That sounds awful. Make sure that you have the deflector plate installed above the barrel. This was missing on some early models and makes a huge difference. Also, be sure that your barrel is sealed. If you skip the step where you seal the seams it can cause problems like that. And finally, make sure that you have a long straight duct run leading into the cyclone. Ideally the first 8' is straight. If you have a bend coming right out of the cyclone it can lead to poor air dust separation. I hope you can get this sorted out. The 1.5 HP units that I had in my shop were very effective at air/dust separation. Exceeded my expectations. The 3 HP unit wasn't quite as good, but improved after I installed the deflector plate.
Your review shows great promise for these machines design improvements. I do have a couple of questions: 1)Was your dust feed rate the same as what is in the video? If so that would be unrealistically slow compared to a real world drum sander or router feed rate and would explain the high separation rate (which outperforms full size professional cyclones). 2) Since you only appear to review Laguna products do they compensate you in any way? Is that why there has not been any competitive comparisons of other brands of cyclones?
Thanks,
Carl
Hi Carl,
Good question about the ingest rate. The test that was shown in the video was done with varying feed rates. I tried to introduce an element of “real world” into it by going from a very slow trickle to a heavier feed, then back again. It was non-scientific, but I tried to find weaknesses in separation. Overall I believe that the feed rate was faster on average than a real world feed, rather than slower. I didn’t time it when I did it, but I’d guess that I spent somewhere in the range of 3 minutes to suck up 5 gallons. I did it multiple times with variations in feed rate throughout the process and saw pretty consistent results each
time.
I have no intention of testing only Laguna products, and I would have preferred to not have so much imbalance in my initial coverage. It has "just happened" this way as I’ve taken the opportunity to have an early look at some new products, however, which I enjoy and people seem to be interested in. I have one more video to finish up on this set of dust collectors, and then I’ll be working on some other videos outside the Laguna family, which I’m looking forward to. Laguna sponsored this project as a firewalled test. They provide product and have no input or influence on how the tests are structured or how the results are communicated. Because of this approach, you’ll note that my findings are dramatically different from theirs in a couple of areas, including CFM (1300 vs. 850 CFM) and sound (81 vs. 70db on the PF1). Those are dramatic and non-flattering differences for Laguna, and yes, it would be interesting to know how these results would compare to other comparable products. I am interested in doing competitive comparisons, and Laguna has no say on whether I do these or not. Doing competitive studies on big equipment like is logistically challenging and time consuming,however, and I need to work that out. But I definitely see the value of this type of information and hope to be able to provide it at some point.
Good stuff, thanks. How well do you find the led sensors actually work in practice? Can the bin sensor especially be relied on to alert you before airflow is diminished?
Hi Geoff, thanks for the comment. The bin full sensor worked fine in my basic tests, but I'll caveat that by saying that I didn't fill the drum enough times to give it a fair test to represent production. My question is whether it will get flaky as it develops static and dust sticks to it, giving a false positive. Just now I tried packing it with dust, and scratching the surface a bit to see if it caused any problems, and it still works perfectly. Time will tell with this type of thing, but it seems like a good quality component from a starting point anyway. As far as alerting you before the air flow is diminished, you can adjust the beam so that it notifies you earlier, and if you do a lot of planing, you might want to adjust it for an early indication because you can go from half full to over full in just a couple minutes with a planer. When I permanently install the PFLUX3 in my shop I will likely set it to start indicating pretty early, because it's a lot easier and less messy to empty the drum before it is overflowing.
You only showed a static pressure curve for the CFLUX. Was there a difference in CFM performance between the C and PFLUX?
Hi Eric, the fan curves are identical on these two units. I had meant to indicate this; sorry about that.
Excellent review. One question about the volumetric flow measurements: You measured flow in an open ended duct. Shouldn't the intended tool be connected? For example, if you need 600 cfm at your 14|bx bandsaw, shouldn't it be connected because it will add to the static load? It would be extraordinarily useful to see results for this test if you'd be willing to hook up the collector to your 14|12 or 14|bx.
Thank you. You are correct; most tools such as a band saw will impose some additional static pressure and the tool needs to be accounted for in the overall design. That, and the fact that performance will decline as the filter is loaded, are reasons for not cutting it close on your air flow requirements. I no longer have the 1.5 HP machines in my shop so I cannot do the specific test that you requested, but I'll do a the test on the PFLUX 3 and let you know what the decrease in CFM is when I add a 14bx.
Thank you. This will be exceptionally helpful and interesting. With two ports vs. one, I cannot decide if the 14|bx will show lower static load than the 14|12, or if the load will be determined by the openings for airflow up by the blade port in the table.
OK, here are the results. This was on the extreme longest run in my shop which I use as a floor sweep, so to be clear I would not hook up a band saw on this port for actual use. The duct run consists of roughly 45 feet of 6" pipe with (5) 90s and (1) 45, plus a 15 - 20' section of 4" flex. I tested with the duct not connected, then connected to the upper port and left the bottom port open and saw an increase in SP of .4, and a drop in CFM of 96. Then I blocked the lower port and saw a further increase in SP or .3, and an additional decline in CFM of 23. Again these tests were performed using a PFLUX3. I no longer have a 14|12 in my shop by it is probably similar to the results when blocking the lower port. If your dust collector is powerful enough you would obviously be better off making two 4" drops off of your main line (assuming that it is larger than 4") and connecting to both ports. Good luck with your decision.
That was fast! You have a system curve in your video at 1:30 which, although for different machines, has a slope of about 75 CFM per inch w.c. of pressure. You see 240 CFM per inch for the first 0.3 inches and 170 cfm per inch when the full 0.7 inches w.c. is added. You're at the end of the line and I'm guessing are far out on the system curve where it is steeper, so what you're seeing seems consistent with the curves in the video (which I realize are for different machines).
So, if I had a minimal connection, just a few feet and maybe two 45 degree elbows, plus the 0.7" loss at the saw, let's say that sums up to around 3 inches total w.c. Then, for the MYC1 I could meet Laguna's 350 cfm requirement for their 14|12, but not the target 600 cfm, but I could get 600 cfm from the CFLUX1. Maybe if we took the MYC1 through a wye to both ports we could get closer to 600 for the bx?
I wish manufacturers gave these numbers, e.g., additional load for a tool vs. cfm and system curves for the fans. I have a little garage shop, strongly hand tools, and only need to handle a bandsaw, so with this ballpark number of 0.7" w.c. (call it 1 inch), I can try to cook something up.
Thanks so much for doing this.
Hi, thank you for the review. I am currently in the market for a dust collector and was thinking of a machine similar to this. I only have what amounts to a 1 stall garage as a shop, so footprint (and sound level) are important to me. Any thoughts as to how these might fit in a space like that? I'm also considering the b- flux or perhaps the rockler dust right system. I understand that those are not cyclones but if space is a factor I may have to go with something smaller. Its hard to find the right one when there are no local stores with demo models set up to get a good idea of size. Thanks for any input!
The 1.5 HP PFLUX/CFLUX machines are not large. If you look at the footprint dimensions on the Laguna site the C/PFLUX has a smaller footprint than the BFLUX. In terms of the dust right system, it's a cool concept but no way will you pull adequate CFM with that using a 20 foot flexible hose, and I'd rather have no dust collector than one with a 30 micron bag. I would bet that if you did an air quality test before and after installing that, you'd find that you're quality decreased. You might find a 1 HP system with a good filter that saves you a bit of footprint over a small cyclone, and that might be a decent option if you keep your ducting short. I've never done any testing with this size unit, so It's a total SWAG, but I suspect that you could get in the 400 CFM range with 5' of flex hose on a 1 HP machine. If I have a chance to test on a machine in this category any time soon I'll try it and let you know.
ToolMetrix at he end of the day, would you recommend the c/flux 1 or the p/flux 1?
I like the PFLUX better, mainly due to the pressurized barrel and no need for the drum liner. This makes it easier and less messy to empty the barrel. The bin full indicator is nice too. So, it comes down to money, but if you can swing a few extra bucks for those features the PFLUX is great upgrade. I am now using the PFLUX 3 in my shop and loving it.
ToolMetrix great thank you. I was leaning that way.
Actually, Trevor, let me qualify that by saying one more thing. First and foremost, buy the machine that delivers the right CFM for your shop. So, if you have $1500 to spend, and you want to get the best machine from this product line that you can, I'd favor the CFLUX2 over the PFLUX1. I'd rather have the additional power. But if you have decided that the 1.5 HP machine is the right one for your shop, and you can swing the additional $ for the PFLUX, then that's a good call.
Thanks Paul. This is such perfect timing. I'm curious why Laguna does not use a filter crank on the PFlux? Is it due to the construction type of the HEPA filter? So would you lean to one or the other of these two units? Looking forward to the comparison to the 3 HP. Are also going to do the competitor comparison?
Hi Jeff, thanks for the feedback. You are correct in your speculation as to why they do not use the filter crank on the PFLUX. I asked Laguna about this as well, and apparently there is a potential that the paddle will damage the filter over time. Based on the air/dust separation results that I measured, I don't think having a cleaning mechanism is likely a factor. 1 tablespoon for 5 gallons of MDF dust is nothing, and MDF dust is a worst case scenario in my shop. Time will tell, of course, but I wouldn't see using the filter cleaning mechanism very often. When I saw that the CFLUX had one, I was actually concerned and kinda figured that would mean that it was not good at separation and that I'd be using it a lot. I was completely blown away by how well they have managed to separate dust from air in such a low profile machine. I don't understand the physics behind this very well, but somehow they managed to pull it off. As far as which one I'd choose, that's a great question. I have a son with dust allergies, so I'm a bit of a fanatic about air quality (my shop is connected to the house), so the HEPA filter is nice and I might lean that way for that reason. Having said that, 1 micron filtration on the CFLUX is respectable. The difference in sound levels doesn't matter much to me, because they're both quiet "enough", and quieter than most of my tools so I won't hear them when I'm working anyway. I turn my cyclone off an on a lot, so it's mostly only running when I have a tool running. The ability to use a bag in the drum without the metal liner is also a big plus for the PFLUX series. I'll get started on the comparison to the PFLUX 3 shortly. Functionality wise it is identical to the PFLUX1, so it will be all about the fan curve, and maintaining adequate air flow in a larger shop. I'll compile the fan curve data shortly and put a chart on our FB page. As far as the competitive comparison, I'm hoping to do this after I wrap up with the PFLUX3 video. That would be a very fun project for sure.
ToolMetrix any idea if/when you will do the competitor comparison? Woodcraft has 10% off of Laguna for most of Oct. so wondering if You might publish your next installment before the sale is over.
Hi Jeff, Thanks for asking. I doubt that I'll be able to pull the competitive comparison off very quickly, unfortunately, but the more I think about it, the more I'm wanting to do it. I'm working on a plan to do this now, and I think the approach will be interesting but time consuming. In terms of the Laguna 3HP video, I probably won't have that done for a few weeks, but I can share the testing results with you if it will help with your decision. Give me a few minutes and I'll publish some data out on our FB page at facebook.com/Toolmetrix/. What I've done so far is done sound testing and enough air flow testing to create a fan curve, and I'll push that data out there. What I want to do before the video is hook it up to a bunch of actual ducting configurations and include the CFM and SP values for each of these in the video just like I did with the 1.5 HP machines. This is a big piece of missing information that I think is helpful for people making decisions. CFM and SP values alone are an interesting data point, but can also be somewhat confusing and misleading because static pressure is not fixed in a given duct configuration, but rather it is variable based on the air velocity.
ToolMetrix I'm not that interested in the 3 HP unit. I don't want to add another 220 outlet and I'm not going to plumb dust collection. Plus I'm limiting my budget on this.
Ah, OK; thanks, Jeff. For the competitive comparison I am likely going to focus on 220V machines for the first round anyway, because the differentiation in fan curves is likely to be more pronounced.
Can the indicator panel be placed on either side of the PFLUX?
That's a great question. It is not referenced in the manual, so I spoke with a Laguna representative on this. They said that it was not specifically designed for this. But I looked at it, and I think you could do it. It appears that you'd have to reroute a small vacuum line, and disconnect/reconnect the wiring to the motor, but it from the outside it appears that the panels on each side are interchangeable and that it would work. I know that this doesn't give you the confidence that you would want in order to buy one, but I'd suggest nudging Laguna on this to find out. One of their techs could figure this out in an hour or so, and I'm sure that they'll get this question a lot. On a related note, the inlet tube can be rotated 30 degrees toward the rear, and 60 degrees toward the front, to provide a better angle for positioning the machine.
I'm looking at purchasing the older MCY model as it's on sale for $500 cheaper than the 1.5 C Flux. Going to be hooking it up to a CNC machine that will be cutting foam surf boards. Do you think I'm better off to pay the extra $500 for the C Flux or will the older model for fine for what I'm doing?
Hi Paul, Wow, that will be a challenging material for air/dust separation. My only experience is with wood dust, so I don't have any qualified advice to provide for you. In terms of CFM, I also don't know how much air flow is needed for good extraction with this material, but at least you can see from my test results what kind of flow you can expect from each model.
Please can you tell me what type and model of filter is for cement or concrete dust. when doing a polish. thanks
I’d say the HEPA filter would work for that. But best to ask Laguna. I only use mine for wood.
Could you tell me about the power requirements for the PFlux3? Normally I would think a 20A breaker and 220V outlet would be sufficient for a 3HP motor, but the Laguna website suggests a 30A breaker/outlet is needed. Is this the case? That means calling out an electrician, which I'd prefer not to do.
+geoff katz I thought the same thing so I tried running it on two different 20 amp circuits and it blew breakers right away. After it was up and running on a 30 amp circuit I checked the amperage draw and it was about 20.
The motor will require 22A at start up, then it will drop to 17A while running.
Where is the review comparing the 1.5hp to the 3hp dc units? You mentioned it in this video but i can't seem to find it. Thanks.
I haven't created a video yet, but I've put a chart with the CFM tests out on the ToolMetrix FB page. I'm still planning to do a video on the 3HP unit but haven't had time yet.
Very informative video. Thanks
Glad it was helpful. Thanks for your feedback. Cheers, Paul
Hey Paul, just curious I was reading over on one of the Woodworking forums that you mentioned somewhere that you didn't get great results with the PFLUX3 until you had talked with Laguna and they sent you some type of steel plate to add to the end of cyclone or something extending into the dust bin, is this true and if so do you have a link to a picture or know what they call it?
Hi Nick. Yes, I was getting quite a bit of debris bypassing the drum and ending up in the filter on the PFLUX3. A different experience from what I found when I tested the 1.5 HP machines for this video, as the 1.5 HP machines produced impressive air/flow separation. When I reported this to Laguna they sent out a very simple metal plate that they described as a crossbar, which gets installed between the cyclone funnel and the drum. I've now been using this for a month or so, and filled the barrel up several times with only the tiniest amount of debris ending up in the filter bin; results that are more inline with the separation that I measured on the 1.5 HP machines. I will include this in the PFLUX3 video that I hope to finish and get posted here soon. For now you can see what the part looks like over on the ToolMetrix FB page. facebook.com/Toolmetrix/.
@@ToolMetrix I guess your still working on that PFLUX3 video 2 years later, since I don't see it in your list of videos. What's the problem? Was it too negative?
i was bummed that I couldn’t get one done. I didn’t have it in my shop long enough to complete the video by the time the separation plate was in place. After that was installed the air/dust separation was vastly improved. I never ran the full tests that I did on the 1.5 hp machines but anecdotally id say it wasn’t quite as good but it was decent after the plate was installed. Without that the separation wasn’t very good compared to the 1.5 HP units. I measured sound output at 87 dB which was higher than the spec but all tools are in my shop are that way. Small shop with Sheetrock walls. It was quieter than the clear vue that I had in there previously and a bit louder than a dust gorilla with a silencer. Amperage draw was 19-20 and I definitely needed a 30 amp circuit.
On the Pflux 1 what do the 2 small buttons on the control panel do? One says system the other says remote.
Also there is a small button on the remote. The manual does not say what any of these do.
Thanks
The button labeled "remote" is for pairing the remote control with the dust collector. The one labeled "system" is an on board circuit breaker.
Thanks,I guess mine came paired to the remote as it worked right away.So is the button on the remote for pairing also? The small one under the start-stop buttons. Did you find any of this in the manual? I could not find a thing about it.
Yes, the small button on the remote is for pairing also. Yes, I found this information in the manual.
Just curious if you had tried running the cflux 1 on a ducting setup. Laguna states that with 5.85 inches of static pressure with 785 cfm. I want to run about 30 ft which equals around 5.5 inches of static pressure.
In this video I went into detail on the ducting configurations that I tested, and the real world data that I produced. I didn't run any tests beyond what I described and illustrated here.
How did you plug it in to a 15A circuit, does it have a regular 15A plug?
Did you ever make the video comparing the C-flux 1.5 to the 3HP? I can't find it on your videos
Hi Dallas, sorry, no I didn’t end up making a video on the 3HP unit.
Read some not so good reviews of the P Flux3 . Is this the reason there is no video? Also, the crossbar fix you mention in a comment, has this been added to all ne units shipped now?
Sorry I missed this. I thought I had responded but I don't see my response here now. By the time I got the crossbar, I was out of time and had to move it out. The crossbar helped a lot, although wasn't as good at air/dust separation as the smaller units. Yes, the crossbar now comes standard with the product.
Just curious but why does your channel only contain reviews of Laguna tools? Seems like a marketing arm of Laguna? I have one of their original mobile cyclones and I can tell you I get much more than 3 tablespoons of dust in the bag after the filter.
Hi Ron, yep, it is Laguna-heavy for now; totally agree. There's one more video planned, which is very tardy, to wrap up the focus on Laguna dust collection. Then there will be videos on other tools, and maybe some projects too. In terms of separation results that you are seeing, our tests show way more than 3 tablespoons too. The test in the video shows twice as much as that, and keep in mind that is only for 5 gallons of dust, so for a full 30 gallon drum (or is it 35?) you would see 36 tablespoons of dust. That means lot of time spent cleaning the filter; not good. I had similar problems with the new PFLUX3, which I'll include in the video when I can find some time to create it. I reported this to Laguna and they sent out a steel plate that gets installed between the cyclone and the drum, and it made a dramatic difference in separation. Now the PFLUX3 is more comparable to the 1.5 HP machines. It might be worth contacting Laguna to see if there is a way to adapt this plate to their old machines.
Hey Paul gonna buy a PFlux just have a couple questions. Im putting the mach. in my rear shop which means about 25' of pipe to get inside my m. shop.Biggest single draw will be Makita 2030N plan/joint. 1rst is will the remote pass through walls? 2nd does the 2HP model have enough CFM to be otimal for the run using 6" pipe?
Thank you
Michael
Hi Michael, the remote is radio frequency so it doesn't need direct line of site, but going through a wall and a long distance might be too much to ask. I am not near my dust collector right now so I can't try it for you unfortunately, but Laguna should be able to offer some guidelines on this. In terms of the 2HP and its ability to meet your requirements, if you want to get 500 - 600 CFM at your longest/worst run, it feels like a stretch to me. I haven't tested the 2 HP unit, but I've looked at the fan curve and it is a bit more robust than the 1.5 HP, but not a ton. A 1.5 HP unit wouldn't be able to deliver adequate air flow in your situation; not even close.
Michael Marquette I just tested the remote from about 50 feet away going through three walls and it worked without any problem.
ToolMetrix z
I know this is a year old, but I just bought the 1.5 HP cflux (it is being delivered today) and everything I read was to use 6" ducting as much as possible. Would 6" be too much for this machine?
I wouldn’t use 6” ducts with this machine. You won’t be able to maintain adequate air speed in the ducts. I’d go 4”, keep your duct runs short and use as much hard piping as possible.
Any problem with downtime on these that you can comment on? Not many reviews for these yet but one of the reviews I did read was negative...stating that the unit had shut down several times and he had no time for downtime. Any feedback on this topic?
I haven't had any downtime. If the machine is shutting down, the owner should have Laguna send some parts or a different unit.
Thanks for the review! I am very curious to know how you think these hold up to the Clear Vue cyclones since I know you've worked with both. Bill Pentz would argue the cyclones and motor aren't large enough to effectively separate and collect fine dust but the figures you're getting and that Laguna is claiming seem to be in evidence to the contrary. I would rather buy the Laguna because it's a heck of a lot more convenient shape, size, more mobile, and quieter, but if Clear Vue is still the supposed "only" dust collector available capable of providing a safe work environment, I might just have to go with the CV1800. I'm torn. Penny for your thoughts?
PS Specifically for a comparison between the 3HP models of c flux and p flux and the clear Vue.
Sure, here are a few thoughts on this. From an air flow perspective you would need to step up to a 3HP Laguna machine to match the CV1800; then you are in the same ballpark. I've posted my air flow test results on the ToolMetrix FB page, and plan to include these in a video at some point as well. I had a CV in my shop for about 5 years and loved it; great product, great company. Given what I saw in my tests, I think Laguna might give CV a run for their money on separation, although it will take more data points than the simple tests that I ran here. I’m a fan of Bill Pentz’ research and I’m extremely grateful for what he has done to raise awareness of dust collection challenges. I understand the theory as to why these cyclones should not have separated as well as they did in my tests. I was surprised by the results myself, and I ran the test again with nearly identical results.
Clear Vue has the advantage of being American made, including the very nice motor, and I also like the ability to quickly see when the drum is full by just glancing at the cyclone from anywhere in the shop.
To Laguna’s credit they have set a new standard for convenience with these new machines, as the drum management system is absolutely superb and the pressure balanced drum in the PFLUX is a nice bonus as well. The Laguna PFLUX 3 is a few decibels quieter as well. I did not have a CFLUX 3 to test, but I'm guessing it is roughly the same on sound output as the CV 1800.
ToolMetrix thank you so much for the info! What is the approximate db output from the p flux 3hp?
I measure the PFLUX 3 at 87 db in my shop.
When you use the crank to dislodge the dust from the canister, a small cloud of dust comes through the filter. Doesnt this defeat the purpose of a dust collector? See my assembly issues too at th-cam.com/video/jIoSGhzS5qc/w-d-xo.html
I'm not sure if you are seeing that cloud on my video or in your shop. I didn't notice that at all in my shop. The units that I had did such a good job of air/dust separation during my testing that there wouldn't have been much dust in the filter to form a cloud. That said, most of the dust should fall down into the bin, and not go through the filter. I'm sure some very small percentage of the tiny particles does sneak past the filter, but I don't believe that it should be enough to form a visible cloud. Either way I guess it probably makes sense to wear a dust mask while you clean the filter or empty the bin. I don't have a flap system on my current cyclone, so I take it outside once in a while and blow the dust out with a leaf blower. It makes a mess but it does a great job of cleaning it. I watched your assembly video; wow, that's frustrating. I never saw the final version of the manual during my assembly because it wasn't available when I got these early units. I assembled four different cyclones in one weekend with a single rough draft manual. Well, actually the older model cyclone had a finished manual that was very nice actually, but the rough draft that I was using for the new models was very rough. I'm sorry to hear that the final version is inaccurate in so many aspects. Hopefully they will take your suggestions and make improvements on the manual. I assembled another one of these at a friends house many months after I had assembled these, and by that time there was an assembly video on the Laguna TH-cam channel. This was extremely helpful, and made the setup super easy. We didn't even use the manual; just followed along with the video.
Dust collectors are not perfect! But only Bill Pentz can filter for 99%!
Always show test without the filter on the back please...
Not only is that not true, but 99% would be considered poor separation. I had a Clear Vue cyclone in my shop for five years and it was great but separation results were similar to these units.
@@ToolMetrix That's really good to know - I was wondering why the Pentz models price points are so high. Good to hear your similar metrics. This was a fantastic review of the Laguna models, thank you.
The clear vue is also a much more powerful unit than these. Not a good direct comparison.
@@ToolMetrix wow, that's pretty remarkable company to keep for the C/Pflux. Absolutely great review, too, btw. Question: outside of cost, what are your thoughts on deciding between the Pflux 1.5HP and Pflux 2HP?
Thank you. If you are planning to use the DC as a portable unit, rolling around and directly connecting to tools, then the 1.5 HP is great. For a VERY small ducting system, it could work as well. For most permanent ducting, however, the 2 HP is a better starting point.
GARBAGE. DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY!
Hi Sam, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I felt that these units compared quite favorably in this class of machine, so I'm surprised to hear that your assessment is so different. What did/do you not like about yours, and which product out there do you think is a better bet in the 1.5 HP cyclone category?
File this comment under useless
Can you elaborate, what did you not like?
Beware the dust trolls.
Without any context I rate your comment the same.
Do you need the bin insert with the P Flux? If not, why?
No, you don't because the pressure is managed in the drum, which keeps the bag from getting sucked into the cyclone.